James 2:1-13

Bible Study at Gospel Light Christian Church, Singapore
by Pastor Dr Paul Choo

v.1 My brethren - James is careful to address them as his brethren before he admonishes them to assure-them that he did it out of love for them.

have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons A common sin among men is to have a sinful respect of persons. There is a respect of persons which is good, eg. respect for a man who is older, for one who is placed in a higher position, for one with greater talents. But sinful respect of persons, ie, judging a person according not to his act but according to his position - and being more strict with him if he is poor, and more lenient with him if he is rich or vice versa. Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment. thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour (Leviticus 19:15). There is also a great tendency to place too much emphasis on outward secular advantages when judging another, rather than inward spiritual graces. Similarly, we must judge what a person says by the Word, not by some impressive credentials he has. If we realise that even a poor Christian is rich because he is related to the Lord of glory - then we will be less likely to despise his physical poverty.

v.2 For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goody apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment - The word "assembly" usually refers to "synagogue" - but here it probably refers to an assembly of Christians gathered to discipline or censure another. A gold ring was a mark of honour or nobility (Genesis 41:42, Esther 8:8).

v.3 And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool - Young disciples sat at the foot of the master (ie, sit here under my footstool). In other words, this person was judged as spiritually inferior by his external appearance (which obviously had nothing at all to do with spirituality).

v.4 Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts? - To judge one's spirituality by outward physical appearances was evidence of their carnality (ie, they were judges with evil thoughts). An unsaved man is far more impressed by physical rather than spiritual attributes, but a saved man with spiritual rather than physical.

v. 5 Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? - Why did they chose to favour the rich when God has chosen to favour the poor? God favours the poor, so that we will not have the wrong impression that God is also impressed by worldly riches, and so that when the Gospel prospers we will not think that man was instrumental in its success. Notice the order of election (ie, chosen), faith and love. How do we know that we are chosen, and therefore have faith? When we love God? How do we know that we love God? When we want to glorify Him, obey His commandments, and love His people.

Every Christian, however poor he may appear, is an heir of the kingdom, ie, "as having nothing, and yet possessing all things" (2 Corinthians 6: 10).

v.6 But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? - Besides going against God's way of favouring the poor, it was indeed strange for them to despise the poor when they themselves were victims of rich men who oppressed them and drew them before the judgement seats (ie, violently dragged them to be judged). It is not that rich men are intrinsically more cruel than poor men, it is only that they have the opportunity of exercising their cruelty more than poor men. Notice how direct James was in charging them of their sin ("But ye have. . .")

v. 7 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called? - The rich are more prone to pride and therefore to blasphemy. Why were they showing unnecessary favour to those who blasphemed Christ (te, that worthy name by the which they were called)?

v. 8 If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shaft love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well - James suspects that the accused brethren would defend their action by saying that they were showing favour to the rich simply out of obedience to God's law to love their neighbour. And if they indeed were being so generous to the rich in their effort to fulfil the royal law then they indeed did well God's law is the royal law because it is the King of king's law, because it requires noble work, and because it will be rewarded with royal wages.

"To love our neighbour as ourselves" refers to the manner in which we love others, ie, we must do everything to others the same way as we do for ourself, namely for good. It does not refer to the quantity, because sometimes "we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren" (I John 3:16) - ie, there are occasions when public good may be more considerable than our own happiness.

v.9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors -In v.8 James makes a concession, but here he hits hard at the likely reason why they favoured the rich -simply because they were impressed with their wealth and power, ie, it was not done out of obedience but rather disobedience (ie, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors). Instead of obedience, they had broken God's law to judge righteous judgment (John 7:24), they had oppressed the poor, they had placed physical over spiritual graces, and they had decided to change God's law from "thou shalt love thy neighbour" to "thou shalt love thy rich neighbour at the expense of the poor". The only reliable instrument that can convince as transgressors is God's law (our conscience is a very unreliable convictor).

v. 10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all It is obvious that no one can indeed keep the whole law for there is " There is none righteous, no, not one" (Romans 3: 10) - but it is spoken hypothetically. Sinful men love to pick one part of God's law to obey (the laws that are "advantageous" to obey) and use it as an excuse, to ignore another part of the law (which they deem "disadvantageous" to obey). If a man chooses to wilfully offend in one point, he is guilty of all - because wilful disobedience of one point of the law is rebellion against the Lawgiver. Therefore to choose what we want to obey, rather than to simply obey God's law, is to set up ourselves as god in opposition to God. Selective obedience is another name for disobedience. It is an attempted camouflage for rebellion. Of course, this does not mean that a person who sins in one point of the law is as guilty as one who sins in a thousand points of the law - but nonetheless, both are pronounced guilty as rebels.

v. 11 For he that said Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the low - The same Lawgiver gave the sixth and seventh Commandment - therefore, obedience to one with disobedience to the other is stiff disobedience. Therefore, obedience is first and foremost a reverential attitude to the Lawgiver, of saying "Whatsoever you say, I'll obey - whether I like it or not, whether I understand why or not, whether it succeeds or not."

v. 12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shalt be judged by the law of liberty - Let us therefore be careful how we live because we shall be rewarded according to God's law at the Bema-seat Judgment (2 Corinthians 5: 10). It is the law of liberty because we are free from the condemnation of the Law by Christ's sacrifice, and because there is much liberty within the Law.

v. 13 For he shalt have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy, and mercy rejoiceth against judgment - If they judged others without mercy, then they were unlikely to be Christians, and therefore they would be judged without mercy on the Day of Judgment. But if they showed mercy to the poor, then they were likely to be Christians, and they would rejoice on the Day of Judgment because Jesus had already paid for their sins.